HRES157-119

In Committee

Impeaching John Deacon Bates, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

119th Congress Introduced Feb 24, 2025

Analysis under review: This bill has generated analysis that may be too generic or incomplete. Clause-level evidence remains available below.

Summary

What This Bill Does

This resolution seeks to impeach Judge John Deacon Bates, a federal judge serving on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The impeachment is based on a single judicial decision: Judge Bates issued a temporary restraining order requiring the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to restore LGBTQI+ health information that had been removed from government websites following an executive order. The resolution characterizes this judicial action as "conduct incompatible with the trust and confidence placed in him as a Federal judge."

Who Bears the Burden and How

Judge John Deacon Bates faces removal from office if the Senate convicts him following this impeachment. The resolution sends a clear signal to the federal judiciary that judges who issue rulings contrary to executive branch policy preferences may face impeachment proceedings. LGBTQI+ advocacy organizations, such as Doctors for America (which brought the lawsuit Judge Bates ruled on), face increased barriers to obtaining judicial relief when challenging executive actions. Healthcare providers who rely on federal government websites for LGBTQI+ health information face additional compliance burdens if those resources remain unavailable.

Who Benefits and How

The federal health agencies (CDC, HHS, and FDA) benefit by having the judicial restraining order potentially nullified, reducing their compliance burden and allowing them to maintain websites in accordance with Executive Order 14168. Organizations opposed to gender-affirming care benefit from reduced legal barriers, as the impeachment effort may discourage similar lawsuits or judicial interventions. The executive branch gains expanded authority by establishing precedent that judges who rule against executive orders may face impeachment.

Key Provisions

  • Impeaches Judge John Deacon Bates for granting a temporary restraining order to Doctors for America
  • Charges the judge with failing to consider that removed content related to "gender affirming care" (which the resolution characterizes as "intentional surgical or chemical castration of children")
  • Accuses Judge Bates of "conduct so utterly lacking in intellectual honesty and basic integrity" as to constitute high crimes and misdemeanors
  • Calls for the judge's removal from federal office
  • Establishes that judicial decisions requiring federal agencies to maintain health information on government websites can be grounds for impeachment

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Impeach Judge John Deacon Bates of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for issuing a temporary restraining order requiring federal health agencies to restore LGBTQI+ medical resources to government websites.

Who Benefits

  • Those opposed to LGBTQI+ health resources on government websites
  • Executive branch authority (supports Executive Order 14168)

Who Bears Costs

  • Judge John Deacon Bates (removal from office)
  • Federal judicial independence
  • LGBTQI+ advocacy organizations

Key Policy Areas

Judiciary, Civil Rights, Healthcare, Federal Government Operations

Primary Purpose

Impeach Judge John Deacon Bates of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for issuing a temporary restraining order requiring federal health agencies to restore LGBTQI+ medical resources to government websites.

Policy Domains

Judiciary Civil Rights Healthcare Federal Government Operations

Legislative Strategy

"Political response to judicial decision requiring restoration of LGBTQI+ health resources on government websites; challenges judicial independence by impeaching a judge for a specific ruling"

Identified Gains

  • Those opposed to LGBTQI+ health resources on government websites
  • Executive branch authority (supports Executive Order 14168)

Identified Costs

  • Judge John Deacon Bates (removal from office)
  • Federal judicial independence
  • LGBTQI+ advocacy organizations
  • Healthcare providers relying on federal health resources

Legislative Progress

In Committee
Introduced Committee Passed
Feb 24, 2025

Mr. Ogles submitted the following resolution; which was referred to …

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Judiciary
2 mentions across 1 clause
-2 negative

Federal judges who rule against executive branch policies, Judge John Deacon Bates (U.S. District Court for D.C.)

Advocacy Groups
2 mentions across 1 clause
+1 positive -1 negative

LGBTQI+ advocacy organizations (e.g., Doctors for America), Organizations opposed to gender-affirming care

Positive-direction: Organizations opposed to gender-affirming care

Negative-direction: LGBTQI+ advocacy organizations (e.g., Doctors for America)

Healthcare
1 mention across 1 clause
-1 negative

Healthcare providers relying on federal LGBTQI+ health resources

Government
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

CDC, HHS, and FDA (federal health agencies)

1/2
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Judiciary Civil Rights Healthcare
Actor Mappings
"cdc"
→ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
"fda"
→ Food and Drug Administration
"hhs"
→ Department of Health and Human Services
"plaintiff"
→ Doctors for America (far-left organization per resolution)
"judge_bates"
→ John Deacon Bates, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia

Key Definitions

Terms defined in this bill

2 terms
"gender affirming care" §gender_affirming_care

Described in the resolution as "the intentional surgical or chemical castration of children"

"high crimes and misdemeanors" §high_crimes_and_misdemeanors

Constitutional grounds for impeachment; in this context, allegedly conduct "so utterly lacking in intellectual honesty and basic integrity"

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology